By Catrina Barker | The Center Square contributor
The Center Square

(The Center Square) – Illinois lawmakers are advancing legislation to prohibit taxpayer funding for conversion therapy, even as the state continues to spend public dollars on gender-affirming care resources – a contradiction critics say exposes a deeper ideological divide over government-funded counseling and healthcare.

House Bill 4554 would amend the State Finance Act to prohibit any taxpayer funding for conversion therapy, voiding related contracts as against public policy. Conversion therapy for minors has been illegal in Illinois since 2016.

State Rep. Bill Hauter, R-Morton, questioned why lawmakers are targeting funding for an already-banned practice while taxpayer dollars continue to support gender-affirming initiatives such as IL Pride Connect, a state-funded hotline that provides referrals and resources for gender-affirming care.

“Conversion therapy has been banned in Illinois for a long time,” Hauter told TCS. “So I don’t even understand why this bill is being brought forward, other than virtue-signaling to their base.”

Supporters of HB 4554 argue the legislation reinforces Illinois’ long-standing opposition to conversion therapy and ensures taxpayer dollars are not used for practices the state deems harmful.

The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Laura Faver Dias, D-Grayslake, could not be immediately reached for comment.

In 2025, IL Pride Connect, operated by the Legal Council for Health Justice, received $250,000 in Illinois taxpayer funding to launch a statewide legal hotline that assists LGBTQ individuals, including minors and their families, with issues related to health care access, discrimination, and gender-affirming care resources.

Hauter argued the state is selectively funding one viewpoint while suppressing others.

“We’re deeply concerned about taxpayer money being spent on what I would call the ultimate conversion therapy, transitioning children,” he said. “Yet the state is banning counseling that encourages kids to wait, to explore alternatives, or to align with their biological sex.”

As a physician, Hauter pointed to growing debate within the medical community over gender-affirming medical interventions for minors, noting that several national organizations have begun questioning the strength of evidence supporting such treatments for children.

“The debate is far from settled,” Hauter said, citing recent statements from medical groups, like the American Medical Association and the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, that have urged caution or delays when it comes to irreversible interventions for minors.

Hauter said the proposal appears unnecessary on its face and may be designed to shield the state’s funding priorities if the Supreme Court overturns conversion therapy bans currently on the books.

“If the Court finds those bans unconstitutional, this would allow the state to say, ‘Fine, you can do it, but we won’t pay for it,’” Hauter said. “That’s still viewpoint discrimination.”

The high court is reviewing a case out of Colorado that challenges whether bans on conversion therapy unlawfully restrict speech or religious expression. Hauter said HB 4554 could function as a legislative backstop if existing prohibitions fall.

Hauter also criticized the bill’s explicit carveout protecting gender-affirming care, arguing it exposes an imbalance in how Illinois treats competing viewpoints.

“They have to be very careful to make sure they’re not banning their conversion therapy,” he said. “They’re banning ours and ensuring state funding stays available for theirs.”